ADSM-L

Re: More on 3590K tape quality issues

2001-05-11 12:51:48
Subject: Re: More on 3590K tape quality issues
From: bbullock <bbullock AT MICRON DOT COM>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 10:52:35 -0600
        Yes, the 'overwrite=yes' option was used every time. It just seems
to stubbornly fail until it decides to work a few tries later... These tapes
are possessed I tell you, pure evil.   >;-)

Ben Bullock
Unix system manager
Micron Technology Inc.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Longo [mailto:David.Longo AT HEALTH-FIRST DOT ORG]
> Sent: Friday, May 11, 2001 10:32 AM
> To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> Subject: Re: More on 3590K tape quality issues
>
>
> When you all label theses tapes, do you use overwrite=yes?  I
> had occaisional problems with new tapes in 3575 library and
> when I started using overwrite=yes, I had no further problems
> with labeling.  I suspect that even with new tapes there
> maybe "something" on the tape.
>
>
> David B. Longo
> System Administrator
> Health First, Inc.
> 3300 Fiske Blvd.
> Rockledge, FL 32955-4305
> PH      321.434.5536
> Pager  321.634.8230
> Fax:    321.434.5525
> david.longo AT health-first DOT org
>
>
> >>> bbullock AT MICRON DOT COM 05/11/01 12:08PM >>>
>         I second this issue. These puppies are a real problem to get
> labeled. We have our IBM CE check that we had the latest and greatest
> drivers installed (tape drive microcode, Atape drivers, atldd
> software), but
> the problem persists.
>         In our case, we also seem to have a higher incidence
> of the 'K'
> tapes logging an error and being marked as readonly. We
> change the tape back
> to readw, and it continues to write and read the tape with no
> problems.
>
>         The new tapes just seem to be very sensitive, and
> throw up the panic
> flag more often.
>
> Ben Bullock
> Unix system manager
> Micron Technology Inc.
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Richard Sims [mailto:rbs AT BU DOT EDU]
> > Sent: Friday, May 11, 2001 9:51 AM
> > To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> > Subject: More on 3590K tape quality issues
> >
> >
> > Postings from customers using 3590K tapes have, over the
> past months,
> > noted problems which most conspicuously turn up when trying to label
> > the tapes.  I had the same problem of I/O errors on several tapes
> > two months ago, in the labeling process.  I persisted in performing
> > the label operation on the problematic ones, and finally
> got them all
> > labeled.  Once labeled, no problems.
> >
> > Today I received a fresh shipment of 3590K tapes (IBM part
> > number 05H3188)
> > and labeled 70 of them.  Three exhibited labeling problems,
> > on different
> > drives. I repeated the Label Libvolume on those three: two of
> > them then
> > successful, one failed.  Repeated on the last tough one and
> > it finally went
> > through.
> >
> > Such is the current state of 3590K tape and drive harmony,
> at least at
> > this site.
> >
> >     Richard Sims, BU
> >
>
>
>
> "MMS <health-first.org>" made the following
>  annotations on 05/11/01 12:33:12
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------------
> This message is for the named person's use only.  It may
> contain confidential, proprietary, or legally privileged
> information.  No confidentiality or privilege is waived or
> lost by any mistransmission.  If you receive this message in
> error, please immediately delete it and all copies of it from
> your system, destroy any hard copies of it, and notify the
> sender.  You must not, directly or indirectly, use, disclose,
> distribute, print, or copy any part of this message if you
> are not the intended recipient.  Health First reserves the
> right to monitor all e-mail communications through its
> networks.  Any views or opinions expressed in this message
> are solely those of the individual sender, except (1) where
> the message states such views or opinions are on behalf of a
> particular entity;  and (2) the sender is authorized by the
> entity to give such views or opinions.
>
> ==============================================================
> ================
>